Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Demolishers
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=7757		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Lord Inquisitor [ Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
Quick one this, coming over from the SM forums.

I think Demolisher cannons are a bit poor, and AP3+/AT4+ and ignore cover just doesn't cover it. They're on par with multimeltas in terms of armour penetration/damage in 40K, and they're simply one of the most poweful weapons out there. Plus in Epic, ignore cover and a little more AP just doesn't seem to make up for the range reduction.

So suggestion: change it to MW4+ (perhaps retaining ignore cover, or not - it isn't a flame weapon).

This will obviously require looking at the points of baneblades and demolishers. Are these vehicles in need of a boost?

So what do the IG people think? This change would really affect Vindicators in a positive way, but what would the effects be to the IG vehicles? What about the army lists?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:39 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
I support changing the Demolisher to MW4+ universally... modifying the cost of the Leman Russ Demolisher Upgrade if nessesary.

Baneblades & Vindicators would seem to need the help. :)


They should not have ignore cover as MW's, however.
Author:  Morg [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:41 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
Whatever we do with the Demolisher, the Ignore Cover trait should remain in my opinion.

Is there a certain reason that MW should not have Ignore Cover?
Author:  ragnarok [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:10 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers

(Morg @ Oct. 18 2006,07:41)
QUOTE
Whatever we do with the Demolisher, the Ignore Cover trait should remain in my opinion.

Is there a certain reason that MW should not have Ignore Cover?

MW ignore cover saves, they only suffer the -1 to hit.  Which I think is reasonable.  No matter how big the explosion you still need to hit it somewhere near the enemy to do something, and if they are hiding that becomes more difficult.

As for the change to MW4+.  I kinda like it.  It makes the demolisher the ferasome short range tank it should be, but at the same time really hurts the executioner who only has a MW5+ slow firing weapon.

Also whch version of the baneblade are we talking about.  The undergunned one we have now, or the properly guned one that has been talked about to replace it?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
It makes the demolisher the ferasome short range tank it should be, but at the same time really hurts the executioner who only has a MW5+ slow firing weapon.

The Executioner has a 10cm speed advantage, 60cm range on its main gun (Double the range), and in my Death Korps armylist the the Executioner is 15 points cheaper.

I'd still be happy with the balance between the two with the Demolisher at MW 4+.

Giving it ignore cover would make the Demolisher considerably more powerful however, IMHO.



Also whch version of the baneblade are we talking about.  The undergunned one we have now, or the properly guned one that has been talked about to replace it?

My favourite idea was that the Baneblade adopt the profile of the ForgeWorld version of the Baneblade (two more twin Heavy Bolters), and I don't think it would become overly unstoppable if the upgunned Baneblade were to adopt MW4+ for the Demolisher cannon too.

Consider how slow a Baneblade is in bringing the Demolisher Cannon to bear. :)
Author:  scarik [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:43 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
You people have hit something with a Baneblade's Demolisher Canon?

Where I'm from its hard to get people to believe the Baneblade even has guns, anything that helps it compare to the Shadowsword is a welcome addition.

The LR Demolisher, however, is already a good tank for its points, the MW chage would definately mean a point increase and probably make them less palatable.  It would certainly mean redifining the basic Tank Platoon upgrade, since splitting the Demolishers into a separate upgrade would allow enormous Tank Companies, and I dont think anyone wants to face 16 4+ RA tanks, 13 is already ugly enough.

So, I vote go for the change, if it helps the Marines then I can stomach a little more trouble in my list construction.
Author:  ragnarok [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 11:06 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers

(scarik @ Nov. 03 2006,05:43)
QUOTE
You people have hit something with a Baneblade's Demolisher Canon?

I've shot with them once, and one of the three hit.  :D made a mess of a rhino
Author:  Bombot [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 11:55 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
30cm MW4+ is too good if you ask me.  Just compare to 15cm MW+ for the multi melta, which is comparable, is it not, in 40k?.

30cm AP3/AT4 Ignore Cover gives the Demolisher a definable purpose.  It?s the units that it?s attached to that ?problematic?.  Baneblades seem to get used if recent battle reports are anything to go by.  But with the Leman Russ Demolisher, you wouldn?t want one in a tank company, and I would sooner attach a Hellhound to an infantry company.  It?s not a useless tank, but there are probably better options.  The problem with the Vindicator is its speed.

All in all, I think the gun is not so bad that it requires fixing.   If it were to be changed, then I would suggest AP3+/AT3+ Ignore Cover.
Author:  Flogus [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
MW4+ (with ou without Ignore Coverts) would suite me perfectly.
Vindicadors et Baneblades are both undergunned, so the MW4+ cannon would make these tanks meet their points.
But the LR Demolishers worth already their points. 250pts the 3 ?
So the IG Tank Platoon upgrade should be "3 LR at 200pts OR 3 LRD at 250pts".

An "Extra attack/+1FF, Ignore Cover" instead of MW4+ would also suite me.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
30cm MW4+ is too good if you ask me.  Just compare to 15cm MW+ for the multi melta, which is comparable, is it not, in 40k?.

Correct, their ranges are exactly the same in 40k, although a Demolisher cannon is more powerful at long range, while the Multi-Melta is more powerful at short range, in general (There are some exceptions which make one or the other more powerful in either situation).

If we were keeping it AP/AT rather than MW, I'd be tempted to move it to AP2+/AT3+ Ignore cover. It really is that strong in 40k that it would easily deserve those stats (TBH in pure stat terms it deserves MW, though this may unfortunately unbalance some Demolisher-wieding tanks at the current point costs).
Author:  Lord Inquisitor [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
Note that the really effective range for a multimelta is much shorter than the demolisher in 40K. The demolisher is definately better against vehicles at medium ranges (ovwer 12" in 40K) and even comparable with a multimelta at short range, and it is the best anti-infantry ordinance weapon in 40K.

While we're on the subject of 40K comparisons, then, two more points. Firstly, 24" range doesn't automatically translate as 15cm in Epic... there are plenty of weapons such as the assault cannon that are 30cm range. Secondly, if you compare a battlecannon with a demolisher cannon, the battlecannon will splat light infantry quite easily but is virtually useless against very heavy infantry like terminators, and likewise good against light and medium tanks but no good against heavy armour like a Leman Russ. The Demolisher cannon, on the other hand, can wipe out terminators and leman russ with ease in 40K. So what does that translate as in Epic? That battlecannons are fine AP4+ and AT4+, but MW4+ is entirely appropriate for demolishers!
Author:  Markconz [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:08 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers

(Lord Inquisitor @ Nov. 03 2006,20:12)
QUOTE
That battlecannons are fine AP4+ and AT4+, but MW4+ is entirely appropriate for demolishers!

Yes, and I was very surprised they didn't have these stats from the beginning.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:31 am ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
I was surprised that they were so underpowered too.
Author:  Jackwraith [ Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
Demolishers and Multi-Meltas are not as comparable in 40K as some are stating here.

MMs are S8, hitting a single target and requiring a 6 to penetrate Leman Russ or Land Raider armor. However, if within 12", they get 2 dice to do so, instead of just one.

Demolishers are S10 and use the large template, which means they could hit multiple targets. However, in the old rules, they would have laid a S10 hit on every vehicle they hit. Now they only do a S10 hit on whatever vehicle is under the center of the template and S5 hits to any others. Infantry, OTOH, are always hit with S10, regardless of where they are under the template.

That's actually a good explanation for why Demolishers are AP3+ and only AT4+, even though I agree that MW4+ would probably be better for them in Epic.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Demolishers
That's actually a good explanation for why Demolishers are AP3+ and only AT4+, even though I agree that MW4+ would probably be better for them in Epic.

It's worth noting that this is somewhat revisionist, as the AP3+/AT4+ was set before the Strength downgrade to Ordinance weapons that are not centred over a target vehicle (Which happened with the 4th edition 40k rulebook, which was released after Epic: Armageddon).

Oh and I still support MW4+ :D
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/